Tax and Spend

[Boojatta]

The production of money itself is a government enterprise. Money is thus tainted at birth with original socialist sin. Why not throw in the towel and establish government-owned factories to produce all things of a military nature that are used by the military? Of course, war would suddenly become unprofitable for everyone, and not merely unprofitable for the majority of ordinary people. There would no longer be a private-sector military complex that makes money by selling things to governments. Perhaps that would be unfair, a violation of a sacred trust. Haven't Republicans always said that government has a moral obligation to tax and spend at high levels to maintain a high aggregate demand?

[Igel]

1. Now that's a strange post.

The production of money itself is a government enterprise.

-- Not necessarily. For the first few decades of the US money was issued by banks, not any government.

Money is thus tainted at birth with original socialist sin.

-- Surely Fascist Germany had money. As well as feudal Spain and the Caliphate. They're socialist?

Why not throw in the towel and establish government-owned factories to produce all things of a military nature that are used by the military?

-- Quality. Efficiency. Originality. We tend to value these things. Have the US government run the factorie and Belize would suddenly find itself able to invade us, if Nova Scotia or the Bahamas didn't beat them to it.

Of course, war would suddenly become unprofitable for everyone, and not merely unprofitable for the majority of ordinary people.

--No, there'd always be managers who deserved to take home more. If only Congressional lovers and their spouses. And it's a given that the largest plant would suddenly have to be built on land in New Jersey that Rangel suddenly discovered he's always owned, but had failed to note on his House assets form for 15 years.

There would no longer be a private-sector military complex that makes money by selling things to governments. Perhaps that would be unfair, a violation of a sacred trust.

--Not entirely true. There'd still be significant private sector innovation. Odds are that private sector companies, cut out of the domestic market, would simply find new and better ways to corner the international market. I'd be interested in seeing a breakdown as to how much military stuff the US produced for US consumption in, say, 2000, versus how much was exported. (Let's assume that exports were actually bought by the recipient for this one, just to not have to agonize over whether a country that pays for something with US export credits is actually buying the stuff or being granted it by the US government.)

It goes without saying that when Belize invaded, the US Army would then collapse only to be saved by Girl Scouts wielding state-of-the-art weaponry.

Haven't Republicans always said that government has a moral obligation to tax and spend at high levels to maintain a high aggregate demand?

--Only under late Reagan and under Bush II, and even then most of them didn't say it. They gave lip service to small government, even as they expanded services and government with abandon. (Which, of course, is also impossible because everybody knows how evil they were because while expanding government they also managed to completely gut it.)

[Boojatta]

2. Did Belize ever find itself able to invade the USSR?

Why not throw in the towel and establish government-owned factories to produce all things of a military nature that are used by the military?

-- Quality. Efficiency. Originality. We tend to value these things. Have the US government run the factory and Belize would suddenly find itself able to invade us, if Nova Scotia or the Bahamas didn't beat them to it.